Search

Background: Hospice care frequently includes hands-on care from hospice aides, but the need for hospice aide care may vary in residential settings (e.g., assisted livings and nursing homes). Objectives: The objective of this study is to compare hospice aide use and factors associated with use across residential settings. Design: This longitudinal cohort study used data from Medicare beneficiaries in the United States enrolled in the Medicare Current Beneficiary Survey (MCBS) who died between 2010 and 2019 and had hospice claims and available residential setting data in MCBS ( n = 1,915). Analysis: Decedent hospice aide use was compared by residential settings; multivariable models controlling for sociodemographic, clinical/functional, and hospice characteristics examined factors associated with hospice aide care in different residential settings. Results: Hospice aide visits were least common in the community setting (64.4% vs. 76.6% vs. 72.6% with any hospice aide visits in community, assisted living, and nursing home, respectively, p = 0.001). In adjusted models, factors associated with hospice aide visits did not significantly differ by residential settings. Conclusions: Despite staff providing hands-on support in assisted livings and nursing homes, hospice aide visits were more common in residential as opposed to community settings, and factors associated with hospice aide visits were similar among settings. To maximize the potentially positive impact of hospice aides on overall care, additional work is needed to understand when hospice aides are used and how hospice aides collaborate with families and care teams. This will help to ensure that hospice care is appropriately tailored to individual care needs in all residential settings.

Background: Given the complex care needs of older adults receiving home health care (HHC), it is important for HHC clinicians to identify those with limited prognosis who may benefit from a transition to hospice care. Objectives: To assess the association between HHC clinician-identified likelihood of death and (1) 1-year mortality, and (2) hospice use. Methods: Prospective cohort study from the National Health and Aging Trends Study (NHATS) waves 2011-2018, linked to the Outcomes and Assessment Information Set (OASIS) HHC assessment and Medicare data among 915 community-dwelling NHATS respondents. HHC clinician-identified likelihood of death/decline was determined using OASIS item M1034. Multivariable logistic regression was used to assess the association between clinician-identified likelihood of death/decline and 1-year mortality and hospice use. Results: HHC clinicians identified 42% of the sample as at increased risk of decline or death. One year mortality was 22.3% ( n  = 548), and 15.88% ( n  = 303) used hospice within 12 months of HHC. HHC clinician-perceived likelihood of death/decline was associated with greater odds of 1-year mortality (odds ratio [OR], 6.57; confidence interval (95% CI), 2.56-16.90) and was associated with greater likelihood of hospice use (OR, 1.61; 95% CI, 1.00-2.62). Conclusion: HHC clinician perception of patients' risk of death or decline is associated with 1-year mortality. A better understanding of HHC patients at high risk for mortality can facilitate improved care planning and identification of homebound older adults who may benefit from hospice.

Background: Despite the growing importance of home health care (HHC) in the care of older adults with cognitive impairment, limited evidence exists about factors associated with documented severe pain among older adults receiving HHC. Methods: This secondary data analysis used a 5% random national sample of the 2017 national Outcome and Assessment Information Set (OASIS) data. Multivariable Poisson regression model was used to examine the association between documented severe pain, cognitive impairment, and a range of sociodemographic, clinical, and cognitive factors. Results: HHC patients ( n  = 183,038) were mean age 79.7 years, 61.7% female, and 78.6% non-Hispanic White. In multivariable models, cognitive impairment was associated with lower likelihood of documented severe pain (prevalence ratio [PR] = 0.96, confidence interval [CI] = [0.94-0.98]). Other factors independently associated with less documented severe pain included Hispanic ethnicity (PR = 0.92, CI = [0.89-0.95]), the oldest (≥85 years) groups (PR = 0.65, CI = [0.63-0.66]), male patients (PR = 0.83, CI = [0.82-0.85]), those with a formal diagnosis of Alzheimer's Disease Related Dementias (PR = 0.67, CI = [0.65-0.69]), and patients with verbal- and speech-related difficulty (PR = 0.83, CI = [0.80-0.86]). Patients with history of falls (PR = 1.18, CI = [1.16-1.20]), positive screen on the Patient Health Questionnaire-2 (PR = 1.36, CI = [1.31-1.41]), shortness of breath (PR = 1.14, CI = [1.12-1.14]), anxiety daily (PR = 1.16, CI = [1.14-1.18]), and anxiety daily or more often (PR = 1.40, CI = [1.37-1.43]) were more likely to have documented severe pain. Conclusions: HHC patients with cognitive impairment were less likely to have documented severe pain even with a range of sociodemographic, clinical, functional, and cognitive characteristics were considered. These findings may reflect a link between cognitive impairment missed opportunities for clinicians to provide pain management. Tailored interventions are needed to better assess and manage pain in this vulnerable group of HHC patients.

Background: Home care workers (HCWs)-including home health aides, personal care aides, and other direct care workers-provide functional and other essential support that allows older, disabled, and seriously ill people to live at home. As a growing number of patients are aging and dying at home, HCWs are increasingly providing care at the end of life (EOL). Although prior qualitative studies have shown that patient death is an impactful and challenging experience for HCWs, the majority of HCWs receive almost no training on EOL issues. Objective: The goal of this scoping review is to identify intervention studies describing training of HCWs in EOL issues to map types of training and to assess the degree to which existing efforts address HCW health and well-being. Design: Our scoping review covered three databases and focused on articles published in English since 2000. Results: Of the 393 articles screened, 26 underwent full-text review and 6 met inclusion criteria. Only one article discussed training designed for and implemented with HCWs exclusively. Other trainings simultaneously targeted multiple kinds of workers. Supporting HCWs in reducing their stress and improving their coping skills was substantially addressed in only one article, although HCWs' emotional needs were addressed less centrally in several others. Conclusion: Our findings suggest that there is a paucity of EOL training interventions tailored specifically to the experiences and positioning of HCWs. We recommend that future intervention studies address the multiple facets of HCWs' stress related to patient death to improve EOL care in the home.